On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 01:26:49PM +0200, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 12:59:17PM +0200, Theo Buehler wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 10:41:07AM +0200, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > > More ibuf cleanup. rtr_proto.c still uses ibuf_add() where it could use
> > > the new functions.
>
On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 12:59:17PM +0200, Theo Buehler wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 10:41:07AM +0200, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > More ibuf cleanup. rtr_proto.c still uses ibuf_add() where it could use
> > the new functions.
> >
> > Two bits I'm unsure about:
> > - I had to change some sizeof()
On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 10:41:07AM +0200, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> More ibuf cleanup. rtr_proto.c still uses ibuf_add() where it could use
> the new functions.
>
> Two bits I'm unsure about:
> - I had to change some sizeof() to use native types (I especially dislike
> the sizeof(struct
More ibuf cleanup. rtr_proto.c still uses ibuf_add() where it could use
the new functions.
Two bits I'm unsure about:
- I had to change some sizeof() to use native types (I especially dislike
the sizeof(struct rtr_header).
- ibuf_add_nXX() can fail if the value is too large. Which should be